Cargando…

Validation of the Work Role Functioning Questionnaire 2.0 in cancer patients

OBJECTIVE: The Work Role Functioning Questionnaire 2.0 (WRFQ), measuring the percentage of time a worker has difficulties in meeting the work demands for a given health state, has shown strong reliability and validity in various populations with different chronic conditions. The present study aims t...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Dorland, Heleen F., Abma, Femke I., Roelen, Corné A. M., Bültmann, Ute, Amick, Benjamin C.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8365733/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33538368
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ecc.13420
_version_ 1783738768894722048
author Dorland, Heleen F.
Abma, Femke I.
Roelen, Corné A. M.
Bültmann, Ute
Amick, Benjamin C.
author_facet Dorland, Heleen F.
Abma, Femke I.
Roelen, Corné A. M.
Bültmann, Ute
Amick, Benjamin C.
author_sort Dorland, Heleen F.
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: The Work Role Functioning Questionnaire 2.0 (WRFQ), measuring the percentage of time a worker has difficulties in meeting the work demands for a given health state, has shown strong reliability and validity in various populations with different chronic conditions. The present study aims to validate the WRFQ in working cancer patients. METHODS: A validation study of the WRFQ 2.0 was conducted, using baseline data from the longitudinal Work Life after Cancer study. Structural validity (Confirmatory Factor Analysis, CFA), internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha) and discriminant validity (hypothesis testing) were evaluated. RESULTS: 352 working cancer patients, most of them diagnosed with breast cancer (48%) and 58% in a job with mainly non‐manual tasks, showed a mean WRFQ score of 78.6 (SD = 17.1), which means that they had on average difficulties for 78.6% of the time they spent working. Good internal consistency (α = 0.96) and acceptable to good fit for both the four and five‐factor model (CFA) was found. The WRFQ distinguished between cancer patients reporting good vs. poor health (80.3 vs. 73.0, p = 0.001), low vs. high fatigue (82.0 vs. 72.2, p < 0.001), no vs. clinical depression (80.4 vs. 58.8, p < 0.001) and low vs. high cognitive symptoms (86.1 vs. 64.7, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The WRFQ 2.0 is a reliable and valid instrument to measure work functioning in working cancer patients. Further psychometric research on responsiveness is needed to support its use in health practice.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8365733
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-83657332021-08-23 Validation of the Work Role Functioning Questionnaire 2.0 in cancer patients Dorland, Heleen F. Abma, Femke I. Roelen, Corné A. M. Bültmann, Ute Amick, Benjamin C. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl) Original Articles OBJECTIVE: The Work Role Functioning Questionnaire 2.0 (WRFQ), measuring the percentage of time a worker has difficulties in meeting the work demands for a given health state, has shown strong reliability and validity in various populations with different chronic conditions. The present study aims to validate the WRFQ in working cancer patients. METHODS: A validation study of the WRFQ 2.0 was conducted, using baseline data from the longitudinal Work Life after Cancer study. Structural validity (Confirmatory Factor Analysis, CFA), internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha) and discriminant validity (hypothesis testing) were evaluated. RESULTS: 352 working cancer patients, most of them diagnosed with breast cancer (48%) and 58% in a job with mainly non‐manual tasks, showed a mean WRFQ score of 78.6 (SD = 17.1), which means that they had on average difficulties for 78.6% of the time they spent working. Good internal consistency (α = 0.96) and acceptable to good fit for both the four and five‐factor model (CFA) was found. The WRFQ distinguished between cancer patients reporting good vs. poor health (80.3 vs. 73.0, p = 0.001), low vs. high fatigue (82.0 vs. 72.2, p < 0.001), no vs. clinical depression (80.4 vs. 58.8, p < 0.001) and low vs. high cognitive symptoms (86.1 vs. 64.7, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The WRFQ 2.0 is a reliable and valid instrument to measure work functioning in working cancer patients. Further psychometric research on responsiveness is needed to support its use in health practice. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021-02-04 2021-07 /pmc/articles/PMC8365733/ /pubmed/33538368 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ecc.13420 Text en © 2021 The Authors. European Journal of Cancer Care published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.
spellingShingle Original Articles
Dorland, Heleen F.
Abma, Femke I.
Roelen, Corné A. M.
Bültmann, Ute
Amick, Benjamin C.
Validation of the Work Role Functioning Questionnaire 2.0 in cancer patients
title Validation of the Work Role Functioning Questionnaire 2.0 in cancer patients
title_full Validation of the Work Role Functioning Questionnaire 2.0 in cancer patients
title_fullStr Validation of the Work Role Functioning Questionnaire 2.0 in cancer patients
title_full_unstemmed Validation of the Work Role Functioning Questionnaire 2.0 in cancer patients
title_short Validation of the Work Role Functioning Questionnaire 2.0 in cancer patients
title_sort validation of the work role functioning questionnaire 2.0 in cancer patients
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8365733/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33538368
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ecc.13420
work_keys_str_mv AT dorlandheleenf validationoftheworkrolefunctioningquestionnaire20incancerpatients
AT abmafemkei validationoftheworkrolefunctioningquestionnaire20incancerpatients
AT roelencorneam validationoftheworkrolefunctioningquestionnaire20incancerpatients
AT bultmannute validationoftheworkrolefunctioningquestionnaire20incancerpatients
AT amickbenjaminc validationoftheworkrolefunctioningquestionnaire20incancerpatients